The fact that AT&T only offers unlimited data to customers who subscribe to its TV service is so obviously anti-competitive that it's a wonder that it's not yet illegal.

Well, no, we have a Republican Congress, so maybe it isn't so much of a wonder.

Well, since Internet infrastructure is a natural monopoly wherever it is...

Though that's more about coax and fiber than the traditional copper ATT's shit DSL uses.

Edit: to complete my thought -- considering individual geographic markets in isolation, many wired ISPs are engaged in monopoly. While many of them engage in evil to stay that way, the fact is that there's little incentive for a competitor to build-out in an area that already has infrastructure. "Natural monopoly" could be thought of as "innocent monopoly", because prosecuting it won't change a goddamn thing. However, if you are leveraging your monopoly to sell something else (like leveraging AT&T's stranglehold on shitty DSL to sell DirectTV), that seems like something the DOJ should care about. Why doesn't it care about it? Because figuring out which markets are being exploited would be super-expensive, and there's authority confusion between the DOJ and the FCC, and there are a lot more important things the DOJ needs to be doing (like making sure there aren't too few hospitals per geographic market).

There's also every chance in the world I'm misremembering my anti-trust law, and there's statutory preclusion to granulated geographic market analysis.

Google Fiber - Faster (not to mention synchronous) connection and it has two options. Also, no haggling over price, fees, and forced equipment rentals every year. DIAF AT&T. There's good reason to hate you and no reason to ever want to go back.

Clearly, AT&T wants people to move to their more costly U-Verse offering. Preferably in the form of a bundle that drives up ARPU.

You can likely buy DSL over AT&T copper from someone else, under different terms. I had a DSL circuit as a backup to Comcast Business Class access for my home office. Since I prefer to not do business with AT&T I bought it from Covad / Megapath / Global Capacity before eventually dropping it entirely earlier this year.

I pray that Tachus.com continues their build-out in our area so that their fiber eventually reaches me.

For customers trying to avoid overage fees, AT&T offers such tips as choosing low-definition video and limiting use of torrents and other file transfer programs.

Building a meter into the router sounds like a great option.

Wait. So you want the ability to check your internet usage without having to access the internet and use more data. That's absurd. Besides ISPs have said quite often that modems can't accurately track that data, only their confidential systems that no one outside the company can see is able to do that. You don't think they're being unscrupulous do you?

For customers trying to avoid overage fees, AT&T offers such tips as choosing low-definition video and limiting use of torrents and other file transfer programs.

Building a meter into the router sounds like a great option.

Wait. So you want the ability to check your internet usage without having to access the internet and use more data. That's absurd. Besides ISPs have said quite often that modems can't accurately track that data, only their confidential systems that no one outside the company can see is able to do that. You don't think they're being unscrupulous do you?

Google Fiber - Faster (not to mention synchronous) connection and it has two options. Also, no haggling over price, fees, and forced equipment rentals every year. DIAF AT&T. There's good reason to hate you and no reason to ever want to go back.

You're comparing an AT&T service that serves rural customers with a service that cherry picks a handful of urban areas to provide service to.

For customers trying to avoid overage fees, AT&T offers such tips as choosing low-definition video and limiting use of torrents and other file transfer programs.

Building a meter into the router sounds like a great option.

Wait. So you want the ability to check your internet usage without having to access the internet and use more data. That's absurd. Besides ISPs have said quite often that modems can't accurately track that data, only their confidential systems that no one outside the company can see is able to do that. You don't think they're being unscrupulous do you?

Google Fiber - Faster (not to mention synchronous) connection and it has two options. Also, no haggling over price, fees, and forced equipment rentals every year. DIAF AT&T. There's good reason to hate you and no reason to ever want to go back.

You're comparing an AT&T service that serves rural customers with a service that cherry picks a handful of urban areas to provide service to.

And yet they choose to not compete in the urban areas either because "fuck you customers" I guess.

My God those plans are complex. At least Comcast has clear package service levels even if their base prices are obscured by promotions and contracts and suspended enforcement of their caps. I really hope this doesn't nudge them into enforcing them.

While data caps are ridiculous, unnecessary and arbitrary and AT&T is full of shit for enacting them, I genuinely wonder if a lot of people are really using 300-600+ GB per month in bandwidth.

I could definitely see it if you had a family with several members each streaming video for hours a day, but even then the 600 GB cap is fairly large. You could probably get away with 6-8 hours of total HD video streaming per day and not hit that particular cap, depending on other usage.

Again, I'm not saying AT&T is at all in the right here, but it does seem at least like a fairly average amount of usage will fall well under the monthly data cap. It could be worse, yeah?

It's the torrenters and the all-day streamers that'll get bit by this. Also, 4K video would be a non-starter...

The fact that AT&T only offers unlimited data to customers who subscribe to its TV service is so obviously anti-competitive that it's a wonder that it's not yet illegal.

Well, no, we have a Republican Congress, so maybe it isn't so much of a wonder.

Well, since Internet infrastructure is a natural monopoly wherever it is...

Though that's more about coax and fiber than the traditional copper ATT's shit DSL uses.

I wouldn't necessarily call it a 'natural' monopoly. These institutions are trying very hard to keep the status quo.

What we need is more municipal fiber supported by local non-profit entities. In this day and age, data should be treated as a utility.

No. I'd say broadband is a pretty natural monopoly. The infrastructure is expensive to build, disruptive to the local residents/businesses while being build, is ultimately limited by practical constraints on how many wires you can run on poles or in conduits and the only reason many places even have two options is because historically they were two different types of infrastructure that have now evolved to both handle the same type.

It is a completely rational business decision not to spend a large amount of money being the second or third provider broadband provider in the area. Expecting competition at the local level based on multiple people building out the infrastructure is never going to happen. Take electric power for example. In area's where there is a single monopoly it is either a CO-op/municipal provider or it is heavily regulated. In areas where you have a choice of providers they share the infrastructure and you only have a single set of power lines running to the house. High speed data access needs to follow one of these models.

meanwhile in socialist europa, 20$/month unlimited Xdsl is common/ a bare minimum thanks to a true competition forced on providers by government intervention.I don't understand the world anymoooooreInsanity.

Why not go after the top 1% of users and ask them to either pay more or change plans? Why make this a thing that suddenly grandma has to worry about? While grandma might not use that much (and unlikely she does) she would never have the technical knowledge to understand what any of that means.

While data caps are ridiculous, unnecessary and arbitrary and AT&T is full of shit for enacting them, I genuinely wonder if a lot of people are really using 300-600+ GB per month in bandwidth.

I could definitely see it if you had a family with several members each streaming video for hours a day, but even then the 600 GB cap is fairly large. You could probably get away with 6-8 hours of total HD video streaming per day and not hit that particular cap, depending on other usage.

Again, I'm not saying AT&T is at all in the right here, but it does seem at least like a fairly average amount of usage will fall well under the monthly data cap. It could be worse, yeah?

It's the torrenters and the all-day streamers that'll get bit by this. Also, 4K video would be a non-starter...

I *average* 500GB a month with 2 people. No torrenting required, just Netflix, Youtube and online gaming.

While data caps are ridiculous, unnecessary and arbitrary and AT&T is full of shit for enacting them, I genuinely wonder if a lot of people are really using 300-600+ GB per month in bandwidth.

I could definitely see it if you had a family with several members each streaming video for hours a day, but even then the 600 GB cap is fairly large. You could probably get away with 6-8 hours of total HD video streaming per day and not hit that particular cap, depending on other usage.

Again, I'm not saying AT&T is at all in the right here, but it does seem at least like a fairly average amount of usage will fall well under the monthly data cap. It could be worse, yeah?

It's the torrenters and the all-day streamers that'll get bit by this. Also, 4K video would be a non-starter...

I'm generally under the cap with my ISP every month, however if I download a couple of games, and actually watch streaming movies or TV shows, I invariably go over. It's not that hard to hit 500GB in a month, depending on what is happening.

Thank deity it's a soft cap and they just send a letter telling me to be mindful.

Why not go after the top 1% of users and ask them to either pay more or change plans? Why make this a thing that suddenly grandma has to worry about? While grandma might not use that much (and unlikely she does) she would never have the technical knowledge to understand what any of that means.

Because they do not need to be doing this in the first place. If those users are using their connection to the point it affect other customers, AT&T could as easily throtle their connection to give everyone else a chance. You know QoS.

Keep in mind that this would only be necessary during high usage times not 24/7.

I *average* 500GB a month with 2 people. No torrenting required, just Netflix, Youtube and online gaming.

How many hours per day, though? My wife and I stream on average maybe 2 hours a day, stream music about the same amount and I download and play games fairly regularly and our monthly usage probably comes in under 150 GB, almost certainly under 200 GB.